On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:40:02 +0100 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi All, > > If you don't care about powerpc you can stop reading :-) > > If you do.... I went to do what I thought was a basic fix up to the > kernel builds on POWER to get rid of the last bits of the ppc32 > legacy, on my list for some time, and it has become more of a slightly > epic slash and burn! generally ACK as it goes into the right direction :-) one note - if I recall correctly from the F-22 testing on G5, then the power mgmt depends on I2C, but because it is built as module, all the power mgmt modules are built as modules and not as built-in as requested in our kernel config. My idea was to make I2C built-in for all arches (and move it to generic config), but I haven't get to actually do the cleanup. > The resulting output kernel configs are for all intents and purpose > unchanged but the git diff is some what epic. > > The top level of the changes are: > > Core changes that apply too all kernels (ppc64/ppc64p7/ppc64le) reside > in config-powerpc64-generic > > config-powerpc64 -> legacy platforms that are older than POWER7 and > their dependencies (here lies the ghosts of PowerPC G5 and friends). > > config-powerpc64le and config-powerpc64p7 contain anything specific to > POWER7 and newer that might affect older platforms, or LE/BE specific > to p7 and later > > I've removed anything that pertains to PPC32 and Cell processors (the > later were all disabled now anyway) but if the kernel docs were wrong > and they do by chance work on some other 64 bit platform that still > works do let me know. > > So the only thing of real note is the ppc64p7 and ppc64le configs no > longer have any old IDE configs enabled or any of the legacy Apple > bits pulled in, I don't believe that should cause any pain what so > ever, I only bring this up because it's the only thing of note on > diffs of before/after resulting config diffs. > > So ultimately please test kernel builds going forward. There's a > scratch build here [1] until we get an official one to test. There's > no perf packages, that appears broeken... even on vanilla pre commit > :) > > For those that are morbidly interested in the diff (and don't have the > Fedora kernel package check out) you can see that here [2]. > > Ultimately the large git commit looks quite scary but the actual > change to the 3 configs are minimal and I believe this should make > things cleaner moving forward :-) > > I look forward to the testing feedback including any further suggested > cleanups to the new configs, oh and please test :-) Dan _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
